Archive for April, 2012

Blacks are much more likely than nonblacks to have an opinion about Zimmerman’s guilt. Overall, 72% of blacks say Zimmerman is definitely or probably guilty of a crime; 1% say he is not. Nonblacks also say Zimmerman is guilty, by 32% to 7%, but well over half of nonblacks say Zimmerman’s guilt is unclear from the available information.

Blacks are more certain about their opinions than are nonblacks. Blacks who say Zimmerman is guilty of a crime are significantly more likely to say he is definitely guilty than probably guilty, while nonblacks tilt more toward the "probably guilty" choice.

Additionally, 72% of blacks say racial bias was a major factor in the events that led up to the shooting death of Martin, with another 13% saying it was a minor factor. Nonblacks, on the other hand, are significantly less certain, with 31% saying racial bias was a major factor, 26% saying it was a minor factor, and 25% saying it was not a factor at all Gallup

Amazing how white and black Americans have totally different perception. The truth can only be one. And the same evidence is known to all. Are racist whites biased and unjustly anti-Black?

Or maybe Blacks (and Liberals) have been taught that Blacks are always victims and never responsible for any negative fate. Not for lower educational and financial attainment of Blacs, their higher criminality. There always is a white repressor to blame. "I am misbehaving and having bad school results because there was slavery in 1860". If it is possible to distort the scientific race and iq discussion, how much easier is it to get a distorted view of a criminal case. As a matter of fact, Whites hide and distort black criminal tendencies. So, if anything, Whites already are biased in favor of Blacks. Add to this the proven lower IQ of Blacks, which makes it more difficult to understand complex issues and see through Al Sharpton’s manipulations.

Of course, media manipulation, like selective editing of the 911 call to make Zimmermann look racist, using 4 year old photos of Trayvon when he was 12 and a mug shot of Zimmermann when he weight 50(?) lbs. more serves to get people up in arms against Zimmermann. To top it off, spanish speaking and Peruvian Latino race Zimmermann is called a member of the evil white race.

Liberals and the biased manipulative press reports probably account for the 31% of non-blacks that believe Zimmermann is guilty. Gallup should also have reported if these 31% consist largely of people who don’t follow the news and thus are the less informed.

And yes, Human-Stupidity already mentioned valid issues on both sides: the cover-up of criminal thuggery of a son of a Sanford policeman, as well as media neglect of black on white assaults in that same city in the same time period.

In the Rodney King case we can see the tendency to assign human rights protection to a heavily drugged felon who endangered people in a reckless car chase and violently fought of police. In the Trayvon Martin case Human-Stupidity keeps pointing out that it is taken for granted that a black man can punch anyone for slight provocation such as following at a distance.

U.S. public opinion about the Trayvon Martin case in Florida reflects the same type of racial divide found in 1995 surveys asking about the murder trial of O.J. Simpson in Los Angeles. In one Gallup poll conducted Oct. 5-7, 1995, for example, 78% of blacks said the jury that found Simpson not guilty of murder made the right decision, while only 42% of whites agreed.

At the very beginning of his 911 call, Zimmerman tells the operator that there have been a lot of break-ins recently. In fact, there were eight burglaries in the previous fifteen months. Where the intruders were identified, most were young black males, including two who invaded the home of a young mother and tried to break into the bedroom she had locked herself into with her infant son. This must have been a terrifying experience, but it was not of interest to the MSM. Zimmerman met with the woman afterward.

Is Twin Lakes in Sanford an anomaly?

Like the 911 calls, Justice Department statistics are a click or two away.

Between 1976 and 2005, African-Americans, 12.6% of the population in the last census, committed 52.2% of all homicides.

That is, over the 30-year period, African-Americans committed murder at about 7.33 times the white rate. (Whites here include Hispanics.)

Of homicides committed by strangers, on average, 18.77% involved blacks killing whites, while in 5.08% of the cases, whites killed blacks. African-Americans were therefore nearly 3.7 times more likely to kill a white than a white to kill a black

Actually, it is worse if you look at the criminality of the individual person. There are about 5.6 times more Whites 72.4%then Blacks 12.6% . So very few blacks kill 3.7 times more whites then 5 times as many whites kill Blacks. Thus an individual Black is about 20 times as likely to kill a White then an individual White to kill a Black person. And considering that Hispanic Whites commit a larger percentage of crime then non-Hispanic whites (63.7%) the numbers get even bigger compared to non-Hispanic Whites.

My math might be off. It looks like Blacks are “only” 7 times as likely to kill a White, compared to Whites killing Blacks (homicide tables). It would be interesting to find the table that separates the Hispanic and the non-Hispanic Whites.

So racial profiling is totally justified. Yes, Blacks kill Blacks too, and certainly honest reputable Blacks are afraid of adolescent gang toughs and probably strive to avoid and fear a group of Blacks more then a group of Whites. In spite of alleged racism that would make Blacks fear Whites.

Police were called, the justice secretary office of the state of São Paulo opened an inquiry into the crime of racism against a stand up comedian. 1 One owner of the nightclub was arrested and released on bail. The night club might get closed down. Sanitary authorities were called and the night club’s kitchen was closed. An alien kitchen worker was sent home to get his documentation.

The crime: a racist joke

The crime? Black comedian Felipe Hamachi had called a black musician "monkey". At a comedy show where all guests had signed a waiver, that they are aware that they can be the target of offensive humor and jokes. The musician was not a paying guest and had not signed the waiver. Rather he worked in the show, but had mingled with the paying public. Legal officials stated that the waiver was legally invalid, as nobody can sign away their human rights. A comedian that can not make jukes without offending a large portion of the population should change his profession.

Did Zimmerman kill Martin in self-defense? There are some indications that he may not have, but others that he may have. So I ask myself what makes sense. I doubt Zimmerman is just a crazy loon who likes killing people, so I think it’s most likely that Martin, a 6’2″ or 6’3″ football player, was beating his old, out of shape ass, and that’s why he shot him. Blurry video won’t discount this. I’m basically making the same judgment I did with the DSK case. Did it make any sense that DSK would rape that slut? Hell no! So it didn’t happen.

There is one major difference: We knew that Dominique Strauss-Kahn is a highly respectable, intelligent, successful man that had his act together and does not act irresponsibly and irrationally.

We don’t know that much about George Zimmermann. He might be a bit loony or out of control. But, the main suspicion is that Zimmermann might have “irritated” Trayvon Martin which prompted Trayvon Martin to righteously attack who Martin perceived as a racist.

Which murderer would first call police, then hunt down and shoot an innocent boy, and, in spite of being an armed aggressor, get seriously maimed, nose broken, back of head banged onto concrete slabs.

Omitted evidence

Nor have we seen any attempt to discuss the time line, to explain how Trayvon Martin got killed at a location he had passed hundreds of seconds earlier. Trayvon Martin had plenty of time to go home, but he chose not to. Instead he and George Zimmerman had their deadly encounter near Zimmerman’s car, where they had been hundreds of seconds earlier. 222323 [wikipedia timeline]

We don’t know for sure, cannot jump to definite conclusion (I wrote in 2012. Now in July 2013 we actually can be pretty sure. In a show trial, the only “evidence” against George Zimmerman stem from deposition of Trayvon Martin’s parents (who reversed themselves after first declaring that the voice screaming for help was NOT their son) and Trayvon Martin’s girl friend who perjured herself several times.
And Trayvon Martin’s criminal behavior in school was not raised in court.

Now I could be wrong, maybe Zimmerman instigated things, but I doubt he HIT Martin first, so Zimmerman isn’t totally to blame either way. Also note that there’s a tinge of anti-gun rhetoric in all this, they want to take away our right to bear arms and defend ourselves, which is an essential right.

Source: all quotes from an author that wants to be unnamed

Presumptive right to violent “retaliation” in case racial profiling or racist slurs

There is a possibility that Zimmermann instigated the fight, by being a bit harsh or unfriendly. By the usual narrative that gives a black boy the right to whoop his white (?) or Hispanic ass. Whereupon Zimmermann would have to defend himself.

Now the second question is, did Zimmerman target Martin because he was black? And this answer is clearly no. The media simply wishes to paint the narrative that a “white” (Zimmerman is actually Hispanic and Jewish, not of the supposedly evil Caucasian group) killed a poor innocent black child who in the picture in the media looks 12 years old –

Manipulative use of photos to manipulate public opinion

Yes, the photo manipulation is eerie. Can’t the media find any other photos then Trayvon Martin when he is 14 (or actually you can find slide shows with photos where he is 5, or where he carries 2 year old babies). What about a photo from 2012 or 2011? How come the media will not publish any of these? And why does it show mug shots of George Zimmermann? And call him white, even though in the US “Hispanic” is a racial term, a socially defined “race”. Isn’t race supposed to be socially constructed anyway?

actually he was a 17 year old 6’2″+ football player who clearly had some muscle strength, wore a thug disguise (hoodie etc.) in a neighborhood that had been repeatedly robbed, probably was a thief and talked like a thug, hell his pictures were even doctored to make him look more innocent and angelic.

Right. How old is this boy? 13? 12? Sure not 17 years old!? Why do they keep showing these photos below? and only these photos below? Were above photos used, the impression would be quite different.

Now there still are rumors that some or all above Trayvon photos are fake. Which would leave open the question: Can nobody in the world, even his own family, locate any photos of Trayvon Martin from the last 3 years? Or are they all thuggish so they hide them?

How come Trayvon could not out-run Zimmermann?

And how come that tall trained football player could not outrun the fat out of shape older Hispanic? So he was cornered and had to whoop him? or got attacked by a law abiding neighborhood citizen who was fast enough to outrun and catch the football player. Why could Trayvon not just have run home? Is this gated community so huge that he could not run home quick enough?

There always is this unspoken assumption that Trayvon Martin has the right to physically attack and whoop George Zimmermann just for the sin of him being a racist, for the sin of racial profiling.

Racial profiling 123 is illegal, in spite of clear proof that certain races commit multiple times more violent crime. But gender profiling is written into law (Violence against women act) in spite of proof that women resort to domestic violence just as much as men.

Stereotyping Certain Races as Having a Greater Propensity to Commit Crimes Is Absolutely Prohibited. Some have argued that overall discrepancies in crime rates among racial groups could justify using race as a factor in general traffic enforcement activities and would produce a greater number of arrests for non-traffic offenses (e.g., narcotics trafficking). We emphatically reject this view. It is patently unacceptable and thus prohibited under this guidance for federal law enforcement officers to engage in racial profiling. 4

Of course, ignoring common sense and inconvertible crime statistics are an impediment to police work. It violates the human rights of law abiding citizens by exposing them to more crime. And violates the human rights of old white ladies that needlessly get searched so police don’t look racially biased when searching young Arab or black men.

Statistically, the black man with skittles and hoodie below has a 10-100 time greater chance of being a violent criminal then our two protesters above and aside. 6

That suspicion, of course, would not warrant shooting a black man for his skin color. But it might be justified to be more careful and to check him out. Even the politically correct protesters and even honest law abiding blacks would change to the other side of the street, were they to encounter a group of such black people.

Generations of blacks have now been told they are victims, whites are evil and blacks are entitled to free money, housing and everything else when very few blacks alive today have ever faced systematic discrimination. If they have faced discrimination it is because responsible blacks are grouped with the great many blacks in America that cause such tremendous crime and problems.

If Whites are held responsible for actions committed by members of my race centuries ago [slavery], shouldn’t it be fair for law abiding Blacks to be held responsible for the black thugs and criminals? It’s simple logic but not so easy under the laws of political correctness.